ReviewBiomedicines2026
Advances in Fetal Repair of Spina Bifida Integrating Prenatal Surgery, Stem Cells, and Biomaterials.
Review in Biomedicines, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The CuRe Trial: Groundbreaking Innovation Raising Scientific and Ethical Questions.Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)Article
- Advances in the prevention and prenatal treatment of spina bifida.Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Spina bifida (SB) is a congenital malformation of the central nervous system (CNS), resulting from incomplete closure of the neural tube (NT) during early embryogenesis. Myelomeningocele (MMC), the most severe form of SB, leads to progressive neurological, orthopedic, and urological dysfunctions due to both NT developmental failure and secondary intrauterine injury ("two-hit hypothesis"). Prenatal repair of MMC has progressed considerably since the Management of Myelomeningocele Study (MOMS, 2011) trial, which showed that open fetal surgery can decrease the need for shunting and improve motor function, although it carries significant maternal risks. To address these limitations, minimally invasive techniques have been developed, with the goal of achieving similar benefits for the fetus while reducing maternal morbidity. Recent research has shifted toward regenerative strategies, integrating mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), bioengineered scaffolds, and cell-derived products to move beyond mere mechanical protection toward true NT repair. Preclinical studies in rodent and ovine models have shown that amniotic- and placenta-derived MSCs exert neuroprotective and immunomodulatory paracrine effects, promoting angiogenesis, modulating inflammation, and supporting tissue regeneration. Minimally invasive, cell-based interventions such as Transamniotic Stem Cell Therapy (TRASCET), in preclinical rodent models, offer the possibility of very early treatment without hysterotomy, although translation remains limited by the lack of large-animal validation and long-term safety data. In parallel, advances in biomaterials, nanostructured scaffolds, and exosome-based therapies reinforce a regenerative paradigm that may improve neurological outcomes and quality of life in affected children. Ongoing translational studies are essential to optimize these approaches and define their safety and efficacy in clinical settings. This review provides an integrated overview of embryological mechanisms, diagnostic strategies, and prenatal therapeutic advances in SB treatment, with emphasis on prenatal repair, fetal surgery and emerging regenerative approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.